Letters: In defense of Metro's ex-leader

Copyright 2010, Houston Chronicle

Published 5:30 am, Tuesday, May 11, 2010

Attacks unfair

The attacks on David Wolff and his outstanding leadership of the Metropolitan Transit Authority are unfair, unproductive and perhaps harmful to the future of public transportation in Houston (“Metro fiasco becomes political blame game,” Page B1, Thursday). Wolff, a respected and successful businessman, dedicated himself to public service in the capacity of chairman for six years of hard work to advance the welfare of the city, spending literally thousands of hours away from his business and his family, and did it free. I agree that management of a public entity must be subject to examination, but the lack of appreciation of the accomplishments of civic volunteers and the severe public criticism will not only harm the individuals but also feed the public distrust of government.

The accomplishments of Wolff and his board are enormous. First, it must be clearly understood that every gallon of gasoline that Houstonians purchase has a substantial federal tax dedicated in part for highways and in part for public transportation. Before Wolff took leadership, our transit dollars were blocked because of one or two powerful members of our congressional delegation. Bear in mind, their stopping our money from coming back to Houston did not save the federal budget any money. It just stopped it from being returned to Houston. Why should transit dollars from federal coffers be returned to Houston when congressional delegations from other cities were acting together and with leadership for the same limited pot of money? Thus, our federal transit tax dollars went elsewhere, leaving us behind. Even promises made before the 2004 referendum that the then Metro board made to accommodate the desires of these obstructionist members of Congress and pass the referendum were quickly broken and forgotten shortly after Wolff assumed the chairmanship. The first light rail in the city was built with no federal funds and all out of local tax dollars, unlike any other city in America. Further, hundreds of millions of dollars have been drained from Metro to pay for “general mobility” for street maintenance not only in Houston but in suburban cities in the Metro area. This too is unique to Houston.

This was the environment that David Wolff came into: a recently passed referendum in which Metro's promises depended on retrieval of our federal dollars and an ambitious program cut back to assure the support of the one or two members of Congress who stood in the way. Incidentally, the program passed by the public was developed after literally hundreds of public meetings and millions of dollars in public money was spent on research and development. Despite these obstacles, Metro has managed to move forward. Bus service has been greatly increased. Expansion of light rail is finally under way. Federal funds are in the pipeline.

Now, there may have been mistakes made. Metro has been beaten up time and time again. I think we need to look at the accomplishments that have been made. I laud Mayor Annise Parker's appointment of Gilbert Garcia, who shares civic sensibilities and a work ethic, to chair the board, and George Greanias, who brings not only financial and public savvy but a levelheaded and pragmatic approach to his work as acting president. I also laud and thank David Wolff and his board for their hard work, commitment and accomplishment. We all should.

— ARTHUR L. SCHECHTER,former chairman, Metro

The name game

The name change debate at UH-Downtown is a classic example of a solution looking for a problem (“Price tag for a new name rises at UH-Downtown,” Page B3, Saturday). In cases like this, the imagined problem becomes insignificant to the solution and associated new problems that should not be created in the first place.